About your Search

20130416
20130424
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8
be read his miranda rights. moving past the politics of it because it seems to get a little poe lit kal, as a former member of fbi how does whether or not the suspect is read his miranda rights influence or impact your investigation? >> it really becomes irrelevant. good report-based interviewers and interrogators who are the ones most effective. the fbi doesn't do that because we're nice. we do that because it worked. in reported based interviewers miranda they can read that and continue. it is not a major obstacle. it is almost irrelevant. jenna: really? we're hearing a it is a major issue whether we get to the bottom of this investigation. so what should we consider as we continue to hear the debate ongoing over the next several days? >> it doesn't, it really doesn't make that much difference to the interviewers and especially the particular group of profile he is -- profilers they developed at quantico, at the fbi academy. this is not terribly relevant. they can sit down with the people. they can interview them. they look for behavioral cues. they look for a way to establish a relat
gathering purposes since he's been president. when we read these people their miranda rights and give them a lawyer the only way you can gather intelligence is if the terror suspect and the lawyer will allow you to do so. intelligence gathering through plea bargaining is not going to make us safe. jenna: so we spoke to a former member of the fbi on our show yesterday that seems to not have a problem with miranda rights, that is their opinion. we'll see what they get as far as information from this one suspect. >> can i mention something. jenna: please. >> i don't have a problem with miranda rights. this man can only be tried in federal court. he's never eligible for military commissions. a first year law student could convict this person. what i'm worried about is what does he know about future attacks? he's telling us that his brother was the bad guy, he's sort of just along for the ride. they had no international connections. guess what, he's down-playing his involvement. what i am suggesting is that we use the national security legal system where we can interview him without a lawyer to
okayed the suspension of the suspect's miranda rights. is that a temporary suspension? >> reporter: yes, by law it is. it's called the public safety exception to the miranda rule. normally you have to tell someone they have a right to remain silent and if you don't, then you can't use anything they tell you in court. so that's why the miranda warning is given. but there is an exception. you don't have to do it if there's a possible threat to public safety. and here obviously there's a concern about whether there are potential accomplices. investigators say they haven't found any. or other explosives. they say they haven't found any of those either but that's what they want to ask him. and this exception probably begins to expire the moment you invoke it so it's probably no good for more than a day or two but nonetheless they can do that. afterwards they'll have to give him his miranda warning and say whether he'll continue to answer questions. the justice department says even in very serious cases like this, most people in custody do continue to talk. >> pete, who's going to be interrog
with american citizens. it allows the justice department to delay reading a suspect his miranda rights if doing so is in the interest of -- quote -- "public safety." the administration had rightly invoked this public safety exception in the case of the boston suspect which provided our national security professionals a discreet period of time to gather intelligence from the suspect without the presence of his lawyer. however, soon after questioning him this way, the administration recently reversed itself and read the suspect his miranda rights. in doing so, the administration, in my view, gave up a valuable opportunity to lawfully and thoroughly question the suspect for purposes of gathering intelligence about potential future terrorist plots. whether we will be able to acquire such information has now been left entirely at the discretion of the suspect and his lawyer. put simply, the suspect has been told he has the right to remain silent, and if he doesn't want to provide intelligence, he doesn't have to. is this a responsible balance between a citizen's rights and our national security? the
was provided before or after that judge/magistrate was there and r read him his miranda rights? the right to remain silent and the right to have an attorney? >> sources have indicated to us that was part of a questioning that they did under the -- fbi agent does under a national security exemption, before he was assigned counsel. they had the ability in the interest of public safety exception to be able to ask questions, were there additional coconspirators, where and were there additional explosives. the source of things you want to know immediately in order to protect the public. presumably base wanted on what we are hearing, those are the questions they asked and the kinds of responses prior to the first appearance yesterday. >> that would fit in with the public safety exception in the there a in providing the miranda rights to this criminal defendant as he now is, charges have been read to him. fran, we'll stay in close touch with you, fran townsend. much more from boston in just a moment. other news that we're watching as well. the fbi, back in washington, up on capitol hill, lawmake
to see his miranda rights read to him in bed. it's laughable. >> the enemy is radical islam. >> i'd waterboard him, myself. >>> you are about to look live at a press conference in boston. where governor deval patrick and mayor thomas menino are about to speak about the formation and purpose of the one fund boston campaign. designed to assist those who are affected by last week's bomb attacks. this takes place as dzhokhar tsarnaev lies in a hospital bed facing charges. his condition now reported as fair. more than a week after the bombing, 45 of the scores of wounded remain hospitalized, and at least 13 have lost limbs. for the victims, the physical and emotional toll comes with a very real financial one as well. massive bills for trauma care, prosthetic limbs and even home modifications. not to mention, lengthy physical rehab and psychological counseling. as such, one fund boston is stepping in to help. already raising over $10 million for victims and their families. and while the injured struggle with recovery, the families of those killed in the bombing are facing their own stag
with the miranda rights? one of theeissues we worked in congress and a very concerned about is whether he runs right away and gets a lawyer. i think there needs to be a u.s. attorney right beside those fbi agents. there's a public safety exception in a time like this that they have to get to the guy and find out as much as they can about any other kind of imminent threat before he lawyers up and nobody talks to him. neil: your fear is if he's killed it complicates things? >> oh, absolutely. not only what we might learn, but what we need to learn about what may have happened in the months proceeding this. neil: okay, chairman, thank you very much. our local -- >> thank you, neil. neil: our local fox affiliate now reports now that the suspect is now in custody. this is, again, something we are hearing from the local fox affiliate. we have no other confirmation of that, but that the suspect is in dust di meaning he's been taken alive. we don't know what condition he's in, but to a friend and colleague and now producer on the scene when all of this went down, fox news on the ground, chris, you wer
the miranda rights. there is a due process in a battle. it becomes more of a question into eating dinner in the house and then it's an even bigger push into eating dinner in america, in a cafÉ or in your house. that was a huge question but it works all the way back. is a spectrum, and also can go to war in molly or libya under the use of authorization of force that was done for afghanistan? i'll tell you how hard this battle will be. i tried to remove the use of force authorization of force for iraq last year. the war is over that i couldn't even stop the war that is already done. the reason why think it's important to take the use of authorization force back, that's the people's power and congress' power. it's ultimately the people's power through congress, but that power was separated and as long as we have a dangling out there, we have given carte blanche to any president to commit war anytime anywhere. and then there's the debate of whether or not they can infringe upon civil liberties here at home through that force. so no, i don't think we can completely get rid of it. i think wha
Search Results 0 to 7 of about 8